You have probably heard about the CEO of Mozilla (makers of the open source Firefox browser) losing his job when it was learned that he had given some money to support that referendum in California a few years ago that would block gay marriage in that state. Since the contribution records have been made public, lots of other people could conceivably lose their livelihoods in this new activist climate. Peter Wehner has some good observations about this whole mindset of punishing people for their beliefs. [Read more...]

Contrary to the critics who argue that homeschooling makes kids insular and intolerant and that we need public schools to establish social cohesion, a new study has found that college students who had been homeschooled are actually more tolerant of people with different political views than are products of public schools.

Liberals used to champion individual freedom, including religious liberty. But, argues Family Policy Institute scholar Joseph Backholm, that concern has shifted to a new set of values centered around tolerance, the need to prevent anyone from being discriminated against. To the point that some Democratic lawmakers and the American Civil Liberties Union are now opposing religious liberty laws they themselves wrote! After the jump, read Backholm’s essay Why the Left Abandoned Religious Freedom. [Read more...]

It has long been observed that advocates of tolerance can be quite intolerant when it comes to those who do not share their beliefs. But I stumbled upon these quotations from Herbert Marcuse, hailed as “the Father of the New Left,” who was the author of “Repressive Tolerance” (1965). He teaches that the establishment of a “liberating tolerance” will require the repression of certain people and points of view. [Read more...]

Unable to maintain its 217-acre campus and 43 buildings, the board of Northfield Mount Hermon [a prep school founded by evangelist Dwight L. Moody but since turned secular] tried to sell the campus for $20 million in 2005. With no takers and prohibitive annual upkeep costs, the school sold the property to the Green family of Oklahoma City, owners of the Hobby Lobby craft stores, for $100,000.

The Greens planned to give the property to the C.S. Lewis Foundation to launch a college with a Great Books curriculum. But the foundation’s fundraising fell short by the end of 2011 and the Greens began soliciting new proposals. The family does insist that whoever ultimately takes over the school promote Christianity in “the tradition of Moody.” That has people in Northfield worried about how well the new neighbors will fit in culturally.

More than 100 interested Christian groups toured the campus this year. When word got out that the contenders included Liberty University, founded by the fundamentalist Rev. Jerry Falwell, some school alumni launched a petition drive arguing that Liberty was a “homophobic and intellectually narrow institution” that would be “fundamentally incompatible” with the prep school’s principles. Some residents of Northfield, home to 128 alumni and 60 employees of the school, held meetings to fight the transfer of the property to Liberty.

After Liberty was ruled out by the Green family, residents continued to worry. In April, at a meeting of the Northfield Campus Collaborative—established by the Northfield Board of Selectmen to improve communication between interested parties—resident Bruce Kahn “brought up the ‘elephant in the room’ which was the concern that an extremist Christian campus might polarize and upset the peace and tranquility of the town,” according to meeting minutes. Resident Ted Thornton said it is a paradox that “we consider ourselves tolerant but we won’t tolerate intolerance.” . . .

By June, Mr. Pattengale narrowed down the finalists to Grand Canyon University and the domestic missions agency of the Southern Baptist Convention. Residents expressed concern about both Southern Baptist doctrines and the impact of the 5,000 students that Grand Canyon proposed to bring to Northfield.

In September, the Green family named Grand Canyon as the recipient of the campus. But five weeks later Grand Canyon walked away from the gift, citing millions in unanticipated infrastructure, environmental and other costs. Mr. Pattengale has said there is another candidate with the means to operate the campus, but “it’s hard to get excited” because the mystery school is as big and conservative as Liberty University.

At another public meeting earlier this year—one that included questions about the contenders’ views on creation and same-sex marriage—a Northfield resident argued that “the religious tradition of the area welcomes people of many faiths, belief or nonbelief. There is potential conflict with those who follow more restrictive teachings.”

Tolerance has to do precisely with how you treat people you disagree with and people you don’t like. If someone has no problem with a particular group, that person is not practicing tolerance, since tolerance is not necessary. It isn’t that liberals are tolerant and conservatives are not. Someone from either side can practice the virtue of tolerance or the vice of intolerance. The good people of Northfield may have valid reasons for not wanting a college in their community, but they shouldn’t at the same time pat themselves on their own backs about how tolerant they are. Evidently, they are not tolerant of creationists or those who don’t believe in same sex marriage. They certainly do not welcome “people of many faiths, belief, or nonbelief,” when they seek to keep out adherents of a particular religion. (Well, “many” is not “all,” but not many religions other than liberal Protestants are fine with gay marriage, if that is one shibboleth being used. Are Roman Catholics allowed in Northfield? How about Muslims? If so, on what grounds are evangelical Christians excluded?) To use the ever-expanding phrase about not discriminating according to “race, color, or creed” and add to that “sexual orientation, gender, national origin, religion, age, marital status, or disability,” these folks are without a doubt discriminating on the basis of “creed.”

Vanderbilt’s ruling that campus Christian groups may not require their leaders to be Christians would seem to violate every canon of reason, let alone the freedom of religion. This happened awhile ago, but I noticed something about the story. Consider this account:

Is Vanderbilt University flirting with the suppression of religion? Yes, according to Carol Swain, a professor at Vanderbilt’s Law School.

Specifically, Swain is referring to four Christian student groups being placed on “provisional status” after a university review found them to be in non-compliance with the school’s nondiscrimination policy.

Vanderbilt says the student organizations cannot require that leaders share the group’s beliefs, goals and values. Carried to its full extent, it means an atheist could lead a Christian group, a man a woman’s group, a Jew a Muslim group or vice versa.

If they remain in non-compliance, the student organizations risk being shut down.

So what’s behind this? Flashback to last fall. An openly gay undergrad at Vanderbilt complained he was kicked out of a Christian fraternity. The university wouldn’t identify the fraternity, but campus newspaper the “Hustler” reported it was Beta Upsilon Chi. As a result, the school took a look at the constitutions of some 300 student groups and found about a dozen, including five religious groups to be in non-compliance with Vanderbilt’s nondiscrimination policy. All were placed on provisional status.

Among the groups threatened with shut down is the Christian Legal Society. It ran afoul with this language from its constitution. “Each officer is expected to lead Bible studies, prayer and worship at chapter meetings.” CLS President Justin Gunter told me, “We come together to do things that Christians do together. Pray, and have Bible studies.”

To that, Rev. Gretchen Person – interim director of the Office of Religious Life at Vanderbilt – responded “Vanderbilt policies do not allow this expectation/qualification for officers.” Gunter has been negotiating with the university and has taken some language out of the CLS constitution – including the requirement that Student Coordinators “should strive to exemplify Christ-like qualities.” But he says he has to draw the line at the requirement regarding Bible studies, prayer and worship.

He told me, “At the point where they’re saying we can’t have Bible studies and prayer meetings as part of our constitution – if we go beyond that – we’re compromising the very identity of who we are as Christians and the very thing we believe as religious individuals.”

Vanderbilt officials refused to be interviewed, and instead released a statement saying in part “We are committed to making our campus a welcoming environment for all of our students.” In regard to the offending student organizations, officials said they “continue to work with them to achieve compliance.”

So is Vanderbilt opposed to religion? Not really. It’s a Methodist-related school. It has an Office of Religious Life. And the person laying down the hammer on these Christian organizations is the director of that office, a minister, the Rev. Gretchen Person. In other words, this suppression of religion in the name of tolerance is being perpetrated not by atheists but by liberal Protestants!